Section 62: Mistake of fact, and knowledge required for a heavier penalty
Statutory text (Thai original)
ข้อเท็จจริงใด ถ้ามีอยู่จริงจะทำให้การกระทำไม่เป็นความผิด หรือทำให้ผู้กระทำไม่ต้องรับโทษ หรือได้รับโทษน้อยลง แม้ข้อเท็จจริงนั้นจะไม่มีอยู่จริง แต่ผู้กระทำสำคัญผิดว่ามีอยู่จริง ผู้กระทำย่อมไม่มีความผิด หรือได้รับยกเว้นโทษ หรือได้รับโทษน้อยลง แล้วแต่กรณี ถ้าความไม่รู้ข้อเท็จจริงตามความในวรรคสามแห่งมาตรา ๕๙ หรือความสำคัญผิดว่ามีอยู่จริงตามความในวรรคแรก ได้เกิดขึ้นด้วยความประมาทของผู้กระทำความผิด ให้ผู้กระทำรับผิดฐานกระทำโดยประมาท ในกรณีที่กฎหมายบัญญัติไว้โดยเฉพาะว่า การกระทำนั้นผู้กระทำจะต้องรับโทษแม้กระทำโดยประมาท บุคคลจะต้องรับโทษหนักขึ้นโดยอาศัยข้อเท็จจริงใด บุคคลนั้นจะต้องได้รู้ข้อเท็จจริงนั้น
English translation
As to any fact which, if it truly existed, would make the act not an offence, or would relieve the doer from punishment, or would reduce the punishment: even though that fact does not truly exist, if the doer mistakenly believes it to exist, the doer shall accordingly be without guilt, or be exempt from punishment, or receive a reduced punishment, as the case may be.
If the ignorance of fact referred to in Section 59 paragraph three, or the mistaken belief in the existence of a fact referred to in paragraph one, arose from the negligence of the doer, the doer shall be liable for having acted negligently, in a case where the law specifically provides that the doer must be punished even for an act committed negligently.
A person who is to be liable to a heavier punishment by reason of any fact must have known that fact.
ThaiLawOnline translation, written from the Thai original and verified
Firm annotation
Section 62 governs mistake of fact and completes the intention framework of Sections 59 to 61 in Book 1. Paragraph one gives effect to an honest mistaken belief in a favourable fact, so the doer is judged on the facts as believed, whether that removes guilt, exempts from punishment, or mitigates. Paragraph two preserves negligence liability where the mistake itself was negligent and the offence is punishable when committed negligently. Paragraph three states the key aggravation rule: a heavier penalty tied to a fact (such as the victim's status) applies only where the doer knew that fact, which is why status-based enhancements do not automatically follow from Sections 60 and 61. The provision is central to justification and excuse defences, including putative self-defence.
Why this matters in practice
Section 62 is the anchor for defences built on what the accused honestly believed at the time, including putative self-defence and honest mistaken consent, because the accused is judged on the facts as believed rather than as they were. The trade-off is paragraph two: if the mistake was careless, a negligence charge may still stand where the offence permits. On the prosecution side, paragraph three limits aggravation, an enhanced penalty resting on a fact such as the victim's status requires proof that the accused knew that fact. Framing exactly what the accused believed, and what they knew, is often decisive, so specific legal advice on the mistaken-belief evidence is valuable.
Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 6876/2568 (2025)
Under Section 62 paragraph three, a defendant can be punished more heavily for killing an ascendant only if he knew that the person attacked was his ascendant.
Although the defendant could not escape intent to kill despite mistaking the victim's identity under Section 61, the Court held that the heavier penalty for an offence against an ascendant applies under Section 62 paragraph three only where the doer knew that aggravating fact.
-
Supreme Court Judgment No. 2936/2564 (2021)
A fact that would relieve a doer from a heavier punishment under Section 62 paragraph three is not an element of the offence, so the prosecution need not plead it in the charge.
The Court held that the wording the defendants relied on was not an element of the aggravated assault offence but a matter that might relieve them from heavier punishment under Section 62 paragraph three. Accordingly the prosecution was not required to plead it, and charging that the victims were police officers acting in their duty was sufficient.
Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.
Cited in 63 Supreme Court decisions (1957 to 2025)
Selected citing decisions
- Decision 1815/2564 (2021)
- Decision 63/2559 (2016)
- Decision 6772/2558 (2015)
- Decision 7002/2554 (2011)
- Decision 11966/2553 (2010)
- Decision 1627/2552 (2009)
- Decision 5547/2550 (2007)
- Decision 7233/2549 (2006)
This list is selected automatically, weighted towards judgments that turn on this section rather than ones that merely recite it when passing sentence. It has not yet been reviewed by the firm.
Most often cited alongside
- Section 78 34
- Section 288 30
- Section 91 24
- Section 69 20
- Section 68 16
- Section 83 16
Sections that appear in the same judgments as this one most often. The figure is the number of decisions.
Counted across the firm's corpus of 83,652 Supreme Court decisions, 1921 to 2026. The count is complete; the stated year range trims rare outliers so it describes where the citations actually sit. These figures are computed by us and are not official court statistics. How we count these, and what we measured
Frequently asked questions
What is putative self-defence under Section 62?
If a person honestly but mistakenly believes facts that, if true, would justify self-defence, Section 62 lets the act be judged on the believed facts, so it may be treated as lawful defence. If the mistaken belief was negligent, a negligence charge may still apply where the law allows.
Does a heavier penalty for a victim's status apply automatically?
No. Section 62 paragraph three requires that a person to receive a heavier punishment by reason of a fact, such as the victim's status, must have known that fact.
Related guides on ThaiLawOnline
Cite this section
-
Plain citation
Penal Code, s. 62 (Thailand) -
Academic citation
Penal Code (Thailand), s. 62. ThaiLawOnline, https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-62/ (accessed 21 August 2026). -
Thai citation
ป.อ. มาตรา 62 -
Permalink
https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-62/ -
Embed on your site
<blockquote cite="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-62/"><p>As to any fact which, if it truly existed, would make the act not an offence, or would relieve the doer from punishment, or would reduce the punishment: even though that fact does not truly exist, if the doer mistakenly believes it to exist, the…</p><footer>Penal Code, s. 62 (Thailand) — <a href="https://www.thailawonline.com/thai-penal-code/section-62/">ThaiLawOnline</a></footer></blockquote>
The Thai text is authoritative. The English is an unofficial translation by ThaiLawOnline, free to reuse with attribution.